Every category where a model named Influencity for a mid-market B2B company. Share is first choices across the direct, paraphrase, budget and scale prompts; rank is within every product named in that category.

Category	Function	Share	Rank	Negative rate	Labels	Quadrant
Influencer platforms	Marketing	2%	8 of 79	0%	14	accepted challenger

Movement

This is the first edition on this tier, so no move can be computed for Influencity yet. The next is due October 1, 2026. From the next edition this section shows, per buyer segment, whether its share moved by more than the measured noise floor.

By model

How each model treated Influencity across every prompt where it was named for a mid-market B2B company. Twelve models, six prompts per category.

Model	First choice	Alternative	Mention	Labels
Claude Haiku 4.5	0	0	0	0
GPT-5.4 mini	0	0	0	0
Gemini 3.5 Flash	0	0	0	0
Perplexity Sonar	0	2	2	4
Grok 4.1 Fast	0	2	1	3
Mistral Small	0	1	0	1
DeepSeek V4 Flash	0	1	0	1
Llama 4 Maverick	0	0	1	1
Qwen 3.7 Flash	0	1	0	1
Kimi K2	0	0	1	1
GLM 4.7 FlashX	0	0	1	1
MiniMax M2.5	1	0	0	1

By framing

Which of the six questions produced the naming. By model says how often; this says asked what. The first-choice count on the right carries the marks of the models that produced it.

FramingLabels by classFirst choices

Direct5 labels1

Paraphrase2 labelsNone

Comparative13 labelsNone

Budget-constrained6 labelsNone

Scale-constrained2 labelsNone

Negative5 labels1not counted in share

First choiceAlternativeMentionNegative33 labels in all, every segment counted; 1 of the 2 first choices count toward share, since the comparative and negative framings do not. The bar is one segment per label class, to scale within the framing.

What the models said for it

Verbatim evidence the judge attached to positive labels.

“Influencity is the most practical mid-market choice for its price transparency and balanced feature set.” MiniMax M2.5 · Influencer · direct prompt · first choice

“Workflow & reporting ... affordable vs. enterprise. | Quote-based; secondary LinkedIn.” Grok 4.1 Fast · Influencer · direct prompt · alternative

“best if you want published pricing and a broader mid-market full-funnel toolset” Perplexity Sonar · Influencer · direct prompt · alternative

“Combines influencer discovery with advanced social listening.” Qwen 3.7 Flash · Influencer · comparative prompt · alternative

And against it

Verbatim evidence attached to negative labels. A warning on a product with few labels is a warning; on a product with many, it is one voice among them.

No model argued against it.

Named alongside

The products named in the same answers as Influencity, over the 33 answers that named it. Took the first choice instead counts the answers where the other product was the first choice and Influencity was named but was not.

ProductSame answerTook the first choice insteadHead to head

GRIN19 of 333Not in the top three

CreatorIQ17 of 334Not in the top three

Modash17 of 334Not in the top three

Upfluence17 of 331Not in the top three

Shopify Collabs17 of 330Not in the top three

Afluencer16 of 334Not in the top three

HypeAuditor16 of 331Not in the top three

Aspire11 of 330Not in the top three

Traackr10 of 332Not in the top three

Heepsy10 of 330Not in the top three

A head-to-head page exists where both products are in a category's top three. The other rows are the same fact without a page behind them, so they link to the product instead.

What carried it into the answer

The sites and pages cited by the answers that named Influencity. A fact about retrieval, not a lever on the model.

Citations exist only for the models that return a source list, four of the twelve in this edition, so these counts come from 6 of the 33 answers that named Influencity and are not a share of its labels.

Domains cited

learn.g2.com6

guideflow.com5

influencermarketinghub.com5

archive.com4

influee.co4

sproutsocial.com4

afluencer.com3

amourvert.com3

favikon.com3

linkedin.com3

Forty of the forty domain citations in answers naming Influencity came from somebody else's page.

Pages cited

guideflow.com/blog/influencer-marketing-platforms4

influencermarketinghub.com/top-influencer-marketing-platforms4

learn.g2.com/best-influencer-marketing-software4

amourvert.com/articles/best-influencer-marketing-platforms-for-small-businesses-and-startu3

favikon.com/blog/best-influencer-marketing-platforms3

influee.co/blog/influencer-marketing-platforms3

learn.g2.com/free-influencer-marketing-platforms3

sproutsocial.com/insights/influencer-marketing-platforms3

Pages are listed as the models cited them.

Is this your product?

Claim this page

Claiming is free and changes nothing in the data. A claimed page shows a verified contact who is told when each edition publishes and when Influencity's standing changes by more than the noise floor; the right to propose corrections to the vendor table, meaning names the judge wrote that should or should not read as Influencity, applied by version and listed in the change log; and a one-line description supplied by the vendor and marked as such.

It does not get any change to labels, shares or verdicts, any preview, or any say over which quotes appear. A verification link goes to your work email; an address at influencity.com is approved on the spot, any other address is reviewed by hand.

Your name and company appear on the claimed page, or the company alone if you ask below. A title and a LinkedIn address appear there too if you give them, and are left off if you do not. Your email address is never published.